summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2024-07-29bpf: Track equal scalars history on per-instruction levelEduard Zingerman
Use bpf_verifier_state->jmp_history to track which registers were updated by find_equal_scalars() (renamed to collect_linked_regs()) when conditional jump was verified. Use recorded information in backtrack_insn() to propagate precision. E.g. for the following program: while verifying instructions 1: r1 = r0 | 2: if r1 < 8 goto ... | push r0,r1 as linked registers in jmp_history 3: if r0 > 16 goto ... | push r0,r1 as linked registers in jmp_history 4: r2 = r10 | 5: r2 += r0 v mark_chain_precision(r0) while doing mark_chain_precision(r0) 5: r2 += r0 | mark r0 precise 4: r2 = r10 | 3: if r0 > 16 goto ... | mark r0,r1 as precise 2: if r1 < 8 goto ... | mark r0,r1 as precise 1: r1 = r0 v Technically, do this as follows: - Use 10 bits to identify each register that gains range because of sync_linked_regs(): - 3 bits for frame number; - 6 bits for register or stack slot number; - 1 bit to indicate if register is spilled. - Use u64 as a vector of 6 such records + 4 bits for vector length. - Augment struct bpf_jmp_history_entry with a field 'linked_regs' representing such vector. - When doing check_cond_jmp_op() remember up to 6 registers that gain range because of sync_linked_regs() in such a vector. - Don't propagate range information and reset IDs for registers that don't fit in 6-value vector. - Push a pair {instruction index, linked registers vector} to bpf_verifier_state->jmp_history. - When doing backtrack_insn() check if any of recorded linked registers is currently marked precise, if so mark all linked registers as precise. This also requires fixes for two test_verifier tests: - precise: test 1 - precise: test 2 Both tests contain the following instruction sequence: 19: (bf) r2 = r9 ; R2=scalar(id=3) R9=scalar(id=3) 20: (a5) if r2 < 0x8 goto pc+1 ; R2=scalar(id=3,umin=8) 21: (95) exit 22: (07) r2 += 1 ; R2_w=scalar(id=3+1,...) 23: (bf) r1 = r10 ; R1_w=fp0 R10=fp0 24: (07) r1 += -8 ; R1_w=fp-8 25: (b7) r3 = 0 ; R3_w=0 26: (85) call bpf_probe_read_kernel#113 The call to bpf_probe_read_kernel() at (26) forces r2 to be precise. Previously, this forced all registers with same id to become precise immediately when mark_chain_precision() is called. After this change, the precision is propagated to registers sharing same id only when 'if' instruction is backtracked. Hence verification log for both tests is changed: regs=r2,r9 -> regs=r2 for instructions 25..20. Fixes: 904e6ddf4133 ("bpf: Use scalar ids in mark_chain_precision()") Reported-by: Hao Sun <sunhao.th@gmail.com> Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240718202357.1746514-2-eddyz87@gmail.com Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAEf4BzZ0xidVCqB47XnkXcNhkPWF6_nTV7yt+_Lf0kcFEut2Mg@mail.gmail.com/
2024-06-26selftests/bpf: Move ARRAY_SIZE to bpf_misc.hJiri Olsa
ARRAY_SIZE is used on multiple places, move its definition in bpf_misc.h header. Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240626134719.3893748-1-jolsa@kernel.org
2024-04-04selftests/bpf: add fp-leaking precise subprog result testsAndrii Nakryiko
Add selftests validating that BPF verifier handles precision marking for SCALAR registers derived from r10 (fp) register correctly. Given `r0 = (s8)r10;` syntax is not supported by older Clang compilers, use the raw BPF instruction syntax to maximize compatibility. Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240404214536.3551295-2-andrii@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2023-12-05selftests/bpf: add stack access precision testAndrii Nakryiko
Add a new selftests that validates precision tracking for stack access instruction, using both r10-based and non-r10-based accesses. For non-r10 ones we also make sure to have non-zero var_off to validate that final stack offset is tracked properly in instruction history information inside verifier. Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231205184248.1502704-3-andrii@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2023-12-05bpf: support non-r10 register spill/fill to/from stack in precision trackingAndrii Nakryiko
Use instruction (jump) history to record instructions that performed register spill/fill to/from stack, regardless if this was done through read-only r10 register, or any other register after copying r10 into it *and* potentially adjusting offset. To make this work reliably, we push extra per-instruction flags into instruction history, encoding stack slot index (spi) and stack frame number in extra 10 bit flags we take away from prev_idx in instruction history. We don't touch idx field for maximum performance, as it's checked most frequently during backtracking. This change removes basically the last remaining practical limitation of precision backtracking logic in BPF verifier. It fixes known deficiencies, but also opens up new opportunities to reduce number of verified states, explored in the subsequent patches. There are only three differences in selftests' BPF object files according to veristat, all in the positive direction (less states). File Program Insns (A) Insns (B) Insns (DIFF) States (A) States (B) States (DIFF) -------------------------------------- ------------- --------- --------- ------------- ---------- ---------- ------------- test_cls_redirect_dynptr.bpf.linked3.o cls_redirect 2987 2864 -123 (-4.12%) 240 231 -9 (-3.75%) xdp_synproxy_kern.bpf.linked3.o syncookie_tc 82848 82661 -187 (-0.23%) 5107 5073 -34 (-0.67%) xdp_synproxy_kern.bpf.linked3.o syncookie_xdp 85116 84964 -152 (-0.18%) 5162 5130 -32 (-0.62%) Note, I avoided renaming jmp_history to more generic insn_hist to minimize number of lines changed and potential merge conflicts between bpf and bpf-next trees. Notice also cur_hist_entry pointer reset to NULL at the beginning of instruction verification loop. This pointer avoids the problem of relying on last jump history entry's insn_idx to determine whether we already have entry for current instruction or not. It can happen that we added jump history entry because current instruction is_jmp_point(), but also we need to add instruction flags for stack access. In this case, we don't want to entries, so we need to reuse last added entry, if it is present. Relying on insn_idx comparison has the same ambiguity problem as the one that was fixed recently in [0], so we avoid that. [0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20231110002638.4168352-3-andrii@kernel.org/ Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> Reported-by: Tao Lyu <tao.lyu@epfl.ch> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231205184248.1502704-2-andrii@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2023-12-02bpf: enforce precise retval range on program exitAndrii Nakryiko
Similarly to subprog/callback logic, enforce return value of BPF program using more precise smin/smax range. We need to adjust a bunch of tests due to a changed format of an error message. Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231202175705.885270-7-andrii@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2023-12-02selftests/bpf: add selftest validating callback result is enforcedAndrii Nakryiko
BPF verifier expects callback subprogs to return values from specified range (typically [0, 1]). This requires that r0 at exit is both precise (because we rely on specific value range) and is marked as read (otherwise state comparison will ignore such register as unimportant). Add a simple test that validates that all these conditions are enforced. Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231202175705.885270-6-andrii@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2023-11-24bpf: Validate global subprogs lazilyAndrii Nakryiko
Slightly change BPF verifier logic around eagerness and order of global subprog validation. Instead of going over every global subprog eagerly and validating it before main (entry) BPF program is verified, turn it around. Validate main program first, mark subprogs that were called from main program for later verification, but otherwise assume it is valid. Afterwards, go over marked global subprogs and validate those, potentially marking some more global functions as being called. Continue this process until all (transitively) callable global subprogs are validated. It's a BFS traversal at its heart and will always converge. This is an important change because it allows to feature-gate some subprograms that might not be verifiable on some older kernel, depending on supported set of features. E.g., at some point, global functions were allowed to accept a pointer to memory, which size is identified by user-provided type. Unfortunately, older kernels don't support this feature. With BPF CO-RE approach, the natural way would be to still compile BPF object file once and guard calls to this global subprog with some CO-RE check or using .rodata variables. That's what people do to guard usage of new helpers or kfuncs, and any other new BPF-side feature that might be missing on old kernels. That's currently impossible to do with global subprogs, unfortunately, because they are eagerly and unconditionally validated. This patch set aims to change this, so that in the future when global funcs gain new features, those can be guarded using BPF CO-RE techniques in the same fashion as any other new kernel feature. Two selftests had to be adjusted in sync with these changes. test_global_func12 relied on eager global subprog validation failing before main program failure is detected (unknown return value). Fix by making sure that main program is always valid. verifier_subprog_precision's parent_stack_slot_precise subtest relied on verifier checkpointing heuristic to do a checkpoint at instruction #5, but that's no longer true because we don't have enough jumps validated before reaching insn #5 due to global subprogs being validated later. Other than that, no changes, as one would expect. Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231124035937.403208-3-andrii@kernel.org
2023-11-20bpf: keep track of max number of bpf_loop callback iterationsEduard Zingerman
In some cases verifier can't infer convergence of the bpf_loop() iteration. E.g. for the following program: static int cb(__u32 idx, struct num_context* ctx) { ctx->i++; return 0; } SEC("?raw_tp") int prog(void *_) { struct num_context ctx = { .i = 0 }; __u8 choice_arr[2] = { 0, 1 }; bpf_loop(2, cb, &ctx, 0); return choice_arr[ctx.i]; } Each 'cb' simulation would eventually return to 'prog' and reach 'return choice_arr[ctx.i]' statement. At which point ctx.i would be marked precise, thus forcing verifier to track multitude of separate states with {.i=0}, {.i=1}, ... at bpf_loop() callback entry. This commit allows "brute force" handling for such cases by limiting number of callback body simulations using 'umax' value of the first bpf_loop() parameter. For this, extend bpf_func_state with 'callback_depth' field. Increment this field when callback visiting state is pushed to states traversal stack. For frame #N it's 'callback_depth' field counts how many times callback with frame depth N+1 had been executed. Use bpf_func_state specifically to allow independent tracking of callback depths when multiple nested bpf_loop() calls are present. Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231121020701.26440-11-eddyz87@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2023-11-20bpf: verify callbacks as if they are called unknown number of timesEduard Zingerman
Prior to this patch callbacks were handled as regular function calls, execution of callback body was modeled exactly once. This patch updates callbacks handling logic as follows: - introduces a function push_callback_call() that schedules callback body verification in env->head stack; - updates prepare_func_exit() to reschedule callback body verification upon BPF_EXIT; - as calls to bpf_*_iter_next(), calls to callback invoking functions are marked as checkpoints; - is_state_visited() is updated to stop callback based iteration when some identical parent state is found. Paths with callback function invoked zero times are now verified first, which leads to necessity to modify some selftests: - the following negative tests required adding release/unlock/drop calls to avoid previously masked unrelated error reports: - cb_refs.c:underflow_prog - exceptions_fail.c:reject_rbtree_add_throw - exceptions_fail.c:reject_with_cp_reference - the following precision tracking selftests needed change in expected log trace: - verifier_subprog_precision.c:callback_result_precise (note: r0 precision is no longer propagated inside callback and I think this is a correct behavior) - verifier_subprog_precision.c:parent_callee_saved_reg_precise_with_callback - verifier_subprog_precision.c:parent_stack_slot_precise_with_callback Reported-by: Andrew Werner <awerner32@gmail.com> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CA+vRuzPChFNXmouzGG+wsy=6eMcfr1mFG0F3g7rbg-sedGKW3w@mail.gmail.com/ Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231121020701.26440-7-eddyz87@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2023-05-04selftests/bpf: add precision propagation tests in the presence of subprogsAndrii Nakryiko
Add a bunch of tests validating verifier's precision backpropagation logic in the presence of subprog calls and/or callback-calling helpers/kfuncs. We validate the following conditions: - subprog_result_precise: static subprog r0 result precision handling; - global_subprog_result_precise: global subprog r0 precision shortcutting, similar to BPF helper handling; - callback_result_precise: similarly r0 marking precise for callback-calling helpers; - parent_callee_saved_reg_precise, parent_callee_saved_reg_precise_global: propagation of precision for callee-saved registers bypassing static/global subprogs; - parent_callee_saved_reg_precise_with_callback: same as above, but in the presence of callback-calling helper; - parent_stack_slot_precise, parent_stack_slot_precise_global: similar to above, but instead propagating precision of stack slot (spilled SCALAR reg); - parent_stack_slot_precise_with_callback: same as above, but in the presence of callback-calling helper; - subprog_arg_precise: propagation of precision of static subprog's input argument back to caller; - subprog_spill_into_parent_stack_slot_precise: negative test validating that verifier currently can't support backtracking of stack access with non-r10 register, we validate that we fallback to forcing precision for all SCALARs. Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230505043317.3629845-10-andrii@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>